Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 42

Thread: 9/11: How it Was Done, the Science of Demolition

  1. #1

    9/11: How it Was Done, the Science of Demolition




    9/11 False Flag: 9/11: How it Was Done, the Science of Demolition (911explained.blogspot.com)



    As public awareness grows about the truth about 9/11, it serves to point out that many features of the towers' destruction fit perfectly with standard patterns of demolition. Evidence which at first seems puzzling is in fact consistent with known demolition techniques.


    WTC 7 differed from Towers One and Two in that WTC7 was a traditional "bottom-up" implosion. The Twin Towers, on the other hand, exhibited the more unfamiliar pattern of a "banana peel" demolition, which starts at the middle or the top of a building and progresses downward. The below demolition in China shows the pattern of streamers of arcing debris that we see coming from the Twin Towers, as the cutting of supports begins high above ground level and works its way down.


    Banana Peel Demolition in China next to Twin Towers



    Banana peel demolitions are used for taller, narrower buildings, where there is danger of the building tipping over should the bottom be cut and the rest of the sequence not execute perfectly.

    But first, just how does a demolition work? Students of the truth about 9/11 will not be surprised to learn that it is essentially the art and science of causing to happen what cannot happen without careful engineering: all structural supports in a building must be cut at essentially the same time, so that all pieces are falling at free-fall acceleration through thin air. It is a difficult undertaking to remove all supports nearly simultaneously in redundantly engineered modern high-rises, with extensive cross-bracing which transfers load from compromised members to sound ones. Even then, failed demolitions are not uncommon.

    In the below images we see the principle support columns in the "core" of WTC 1, an extensively cross-braced steel assembly which served as the backbone of the towers, and held 70% of the weight.

    Twin Tower core backbone under construction




    Illustration of main support columns




    One standard technique is the use of "cutter' and "kicker" charges, in which the first set of charges, the cutters, cut the steel beam supports at precisely timed intervals, and the kicker charge "kicks" the cut piece outward. In all the film evidence of the Towers' destruction, straight, cleanly cut pieces of steel beam can be seen spinning outward from the Towers at explosive speeds, across an area at least three times as long as the Towers are wide. Thirty foot, multi-ton pieces of steel beam and perimeter assembly were found nearly three football fields away from the nearest tower, and windows were blown out across the WTC. These startling facts cannot be overstated.


    Cut Steel Being Hurled Laterally at Speeds up to 80 MPH
    <font size="4"><em>






    Width of Debris Field






    Physicist David Chandler Narrates North Tower Demolition



    Using this technique, the pattern of debris one would expect to see lying on the ground after the destruction would be cleanly-cut, straight steel pieces, rather than twisted, heat deformed pretzels of steel as implied by the official "steel got soft and buckled" story. Exactly as predicted, an aerial photo of the debris field shows a thick carpet of arrow-straight, cleanly-cut lengths of steel beam, flung hither and yon.



    Aerial View, Steel Debris, from largest detail photo HERE.







    Wider Aerial View, Steel Debris, from largest detail photo HERE.







    Use of Thermite

    In its famous attack on skeptics of the official 9/11 story, Popular Mechanics held that the melting agent thermite had never been used in a demolition before. Ironically it had, on the Chicago Sky Ride in 1935. It was reported in Popular Mechanics.

    Thermite works by melting through steel like a hot knife through butter, illustrated in the video below.


    Thermite vs. Car





    Reaching temperatures of 5,000F, thermite can be expected to produce large pools of molten steel and iron. This is exactly what was found, to the puzzlement of rescue workers, in the basements of the Twin Towers.

    Relatively slow burning thermite would have been used to weaken strong points in the structures, such as mechanical floors, prior to demolition. So it is of interest that in WTC 2, molten steel seen dripping at around floors 80 and 81 corresponded somewhat, but not exactly, to the mechanical floors at floors 75-77, below.


    WTC2 South Tower on 9/11 Molten Metal North-East Corner




    In the following video demonstrating the use of thermite, the characteristic dripping of molten steel can be seen which exactly replicates, in color and consistency, that seen coming from the towers on a larger scale.


    Thermite vs. Steel Plate




    Another interesting use of thermite can be seen the moment just before each demolition when the perimeter columns around the impact areas seem to bow outward, giving the impression of overload. Thermite melting the core columns so that all load is transferred to the perimeter columns would give precisely this effect.

    Another spectacular coincidence is the "fireproofing upgrades" which took place a year before 9/11, but only on floors of or near impact in both Towers, floors 92 - 100 in WTC1, and 77 - 78 of WTC2, which required the vacating of tenants during the work (page 42, NIST NCSTAR1-6A.)

    Molten iron and steel was not observed dripping from the building until about ten minutes before destruction. This would be when firefighters were reporting that the fires were under control and almost out.

    One thing which stands out about the presence of molten steel in the basements is that it stayed molten for so long, reported for weeks and even months afterwards. This would require a powerful exothermic reaction, hot enough not just to melt steel, but to raise its temperature considerably above melting point in order for heat to be stored, in the same way that water brought to near boiling cools down into the solid state of ice far more slowly than water at room temperature. With the melting point of steel at 2800F, and the thermite reaction reaching temperatures of 5,000F, the reaction would produce enough heat-energy to keep steel molten - i.e. in liquid state - for long periods of time.

    Thus the evidence again fits what we would expect to find in a demolition that was a combination of thermite, and cutter and kicker charges.

    On 9/11, cutter charges would simply have been much bigger versions of the steel beam cutter charge (linear shape charge) demonstrated in the video below:
    <font size="4">




    Linear Shape Charges








    A video simulation of the Towers' inner structure posted at Youtube includes an illustration of a cutter-kicker sequence.




    Demolitions Expert Tom Sullivan

    A demolitions expert formerly with Controlled Demolitions Inc. (CDI,) which was contracted to help with the clean-up phase at Ground Zero, said in an interview:
    "Fire cannot bring down steel-framed high rises — period."
    Tom Sullivan grew up with the son of Jack Loizeaux, president and founder of CDI,and a pioneer in the controlled demolitions industry. In an interview with Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Sullivan stated:
    "that he knew from the first day that the destruction of World Trade Center Building 7 on 9/11 was a classic controlled implosion. Asked how he thought it might have been done he posited, “looking at the building it wouldn’t be a problem — once you gain access to the elevator shafts…then a team of expert loaders would have hidden access to the core columns and beams. The rest can be accomplished with just the right kind of explosives for the job. Thermite can be used as well.”
    Sullivan said:
    "I mean, come on, it was complete destruction. I've seen buildings fall like that for years -- that was the end game for me."
    The means of igniting and controlling the demolition suggested by Sullivan, interestingly, coincides with the one proposed in an early hypothetical blasting scenario by Jim Hoffman, an artificial intelligence engineer. In the section "Control Architecture" of the scenario Hoffman posits:
    Ignition of the incendiaries and detonation of the explosives is controlled through a wireless network using RF repeaters on every floor of the Towers having pyrotechnics.

    Each of the Stage-2 pyrotechnics units -- the kicker charges and explosive sheets -- has an integrated wireless detonator card that includes a 2-channel RF receiver, an accelerometer, logic, dual wafer batteries, and a micro-detonator...

    The detonator cards are programmed to respond only to RF signals on the network's broadcast frequencies that have specific codes. The cards are manufactured in batches of cards with identical codes, where each batch has a unique code and is destined for a specific floor of one of the Towers.

    Of a detonator card's two channels, one provides the arm signal, and the other provides a detonation signal. Once the arm signal has been received, the detonator will be triggered by either of two events: rapid acceleration detected by the accelerometer, or receipt of the detonation signal.
    Below is an image of this kind of system currently on the market for CD companies, published at ae911truth.org (Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.)


    Wireless Detonation System



    " width="640" />[/CENTER]



    Conclusion

    Once 24/7 access to the towers' interiors and the rest of the WTC complex has been established, the planned destruction of the Twin Towers and Building 7 becomes a task for which all technology is well-developed and available. Access is established through Marvin Bush, the youngest Bush brother, who was on the board of Securacom, the company which held the security contract for the World Trade Center complex. According to Barry McDaniel, CEO of Securacom, the company held the contract for security “up to the day the buildings fell down.”

    The nexus which seems to connect many of key players in the 9/11 plot is the neoconservative think-tank Project for a New American Century (PNAC.) PNAC, whose members included Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush, Elliot Abrams, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Zalmay Khalilzad, Scooter Libby, and Richard Armitage, had been openly advocating for an invasion of Iraq since the Clinton administration.

    Dov Zakheim, another member of PNAC, had been awarded the contract for the first WTC bombing investigation in 1993. The investigation was done by a fully-owned subsidiary of Zakheim's company SPC, Tridata. The contract assured that not only access to the towers was secured, but also floor plans, blueprints, and all other intimate technical knowledge of the buildings.

    Zakeim, who was appointed Comptroller of the Pentagon by Bush upon taking office, was also in charge of the Pentagon's finances at the time $2.3 trillion was announced missing from the Pentagon, on September 10 the day before 9/11. Needless to say, after 9/11 "the day the world changed," the story was dropped from the media.

    In another coincidence involving Zakheim, his company SPC (of which he was CEO and main shareholder) also invented remote 'anti-hijack" technology, by which an airliner's controls could be seized from the ground to foil hijackers. This technology has obvious ramifications for misuse in the wrong hands.

    In a city like New York, the world's most dynamic metropolis, the "city that never sleeps," extra work crews, maintenance crews, technicians, and delivery trucks working round-the-clock would not be noticed. Nevertheless, some people did notice certain unusual events, such as a series of "power downs" and a generally unusual amount of activity in the months before 9/11. In the below video a worker describes a "power down" condition days before 9/11, which would have disabled security cameras and alarms.



    Worker Describes "Power Down" Days Before 9/11





    One favorite contention of defenders of the official story is that the aircraft impacts would have set-off or destroyed explosive charges. But the loss of a number of charges would be of no consequence in a redundantly "wired" impact zone, since only specific encoded signals could actually arm and trigger the entire detonation sequence.

    As Air Force Col. Bob Bowman once said: "If they have nothing to hide, why are they hiding everything?" The immediate, illegal destruction of 99.5% of the steel evidence, shipped to and melted in China, ensures that the vast majority of the steel can never be examined and tested to either confirm or disprove the presence of the above demolition techniques. This alone, said Bowman, is evidence of guilt.

    Some kinds of thermite can be applied in a "sol-gel" solution, which can be rolled on like paint, or fireproofing. Think how inconvenient, then, to have steel beams examined and found to have layers of residual thermite paint. It is no wonder that putting the steel onto ships bound for China, immediately, was of the utmost importance, even if it represented felony destruction of evidence.

    In the end the testimony of firefighters and other responders, like Firefighter John Schroeder below, stands as the most powerful indicator of what happened that day. Schroeder, who says he does not believe the official story, and who was on the 24th floor of the North Tower, reports explosions rocking the building from the inside, as it seemed to "disintegrate" from the core and the stairwells. This is precisely the part of the structure which would be most critical to weaken before a final demolition sequence.


    Firefighter John Schroeder




    There is no shortage of testimony corroborating Schroeder's description of explosions throughout the morning, which might correspond to the preliminary weakening of the buildings' strong points. Not one of these reports of explosions was included in the official 9/11 Commission report.

    One such explosion is captured on video below.



    The audio evidence includes footage of what is clearly an accelerating demolition sequence, below.


    Explosive Sequence, South Tower


    Finally, there is the plethora of other puzzles beyond the scope of this essay, the scheduling of multiple war-games on the fateful day which sent much of the air defense force outside the nation's borders, the fantastic sudden flying skills of incompetent pilots, and of course the impossibility of the official explanation relying on a notion of mass accelerating in proportion to its increasing weight, which is a physics chimera (all mass of any weight accelerates to the ground at the same rate, and can only go slower as it meets resistance, not faster, as it was shown by Galileo.)

    It is important to know that jet fuel is only kerosene, with no hotter burning temperature in open air than store-bought kerosene or barbecue lighter fluid. With most of the fuel blown out in the impact fireballs anyway, it is patently impossible for mere kerosene and office furniture to have burned any differently from standard office fires, at temperatures of rarely more than 800F before flashover.


    It is also important to understand the impact of the planes could have caused no appreciable weakening of the lower three-quarters of the structures below the impact zones. Essentially hollow aluminum tubes except for the engines and landing gear, the planes were mostly shredded on impact with the steel latticework, as shown below. Moreover, the towers were designed to specifically withstand even multiple impacts of jumbo jetliners.




    Other anomalies and coincidences in the evidence of 9/11 continue to arise, and together with the above demolition hypothesis continue to provide clues as to just how it was done.

    This essay is dedicated to U.S. Air Force Colonel Dr. Robert Bowman, (1934-2013,) without whom the movement for 9/11 truth would not be where it is today.

    Important further reading and resources

    U.S. Military Officers and Patriots Question 9/11

    9/11 Skeptics to Mark Anniversary with Vigils, Lawsuit

    Who Did 9/11: Technology of Autopilot/Remote Flight. Motive, Means, Opportunity

    9/11Evidence.org

    9/11 Truth Action Project

    9/11Research

    Pilots for 9/11 Truth

    Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

    Documentary: 9/11 The New Pearl Harbor

    Last edited by James_Madison_Lives; 09-11-2022 at 04:53 PM.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    The BOk tower at the Williams Center. Same architect, six years newer. Same structure. Except for the scale (less than half as tall, and much narrower in both width and length) the main architectural difference between this and the Twin Towers is that the lobby windows are arched.

    Note the complete lack of verticals between the 'elevator core' and the outer walls.







    Those towers were very unique in terms of their structure (I believe this one was the only other built that way), and that makes the official narrative that much more ridiculous.
    Last edited by acptulsa; 09-11-2022 at 04:57 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    And?
    Dems cheat.
    Trump stopped them cheating.

    A clear case of Liberty preserving authoritarianism.

  4. #3
    For reference/comparison to WTC7, consider the 2009 Beijing Television Cultural Center fire:



    Afterwards, this is what the building looked like:



    I guess Chinese steel is just super-strong...
    Psalm 35:7-10, Psalm 109, Isaiah 13:9

  5. #4
    I have 1/8 thick 4’ X 4’ piece of steel I use as outdoor fire pit

    (Hasn’t melted yet)

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    And?
    Dems cheat.
    Trump stopped them cheating.

    A clear case of Liberty preserving authoritarianism.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    If you can believe this is a Boeing 757 airliner crash-site:



    ... but can't believe in God because "there's no evidence he exists"... you need to get your head examined.
    Psalm 35:7-10, Psalm 109, Isaiah 13:9

  8. #7
    Jill Biden at Shanksville and Kocksucker Harris in Manhattan? What's wrong with the Resident? His Alzheimer's acting up today? Or did they decide an Adolpedo Hitler with snow on the roof maybe wouldn't strike the right tone for the occasion?
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    And?
    Dems cheat.
    Trump stopped them cheating.

    A clear case of Liberty preserving authoritarianism.

  9. #8
    The pentagon is the one that really gets me. The only known (released) footage of that moments before impact isn't great quality, but I've never been able to make myself believe that it was something the size of an airliner that hit the building that day.

    I do think the more plausible circumstances of 9/11 are that the intelligence agencies knew there were people planning an attack and simply didn't stop them. It's a common tactic and the likely M.O. of the mass shootings these days. They simply had to sit back and do nothing, which is what they did.
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    This is getting silly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It started silly.
    T.S. Eliot's The Hollow Men

    "One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." - Plato

    We Are Running Out of Time - Mini Me



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by nobody's_hero View Post
    The pentagon is the one that really gets me. The only known (released) footage of that moments before impact isn't great quality, but I've never been able to make myself believe that it was something the size of an airliner that hit the building that day.

    I do think the more plausible circumstances of 9/11 are that the intelligence agencies knew there were people planning an attack and simply didn't stop them. It's a common tactic and the likely M.O. of the mass shootings these days. They simply had to sit back and do nothing, which is what they did.
    The Pentagon was meant to be a "honeypot," a distraction to get everyone arguing and away from the much more easily proven points that towers cannot collapse symmetrically in seconds without being wired.



    Buildng 7, do you believe your eyes or what the government tells you?

    Last edited by James_Madison_Lives; 09-17-2022 at 06:20 PM.

  12. #10
    WTC7 was built by Larry A Silverstein

    It was the ONLY building he ever built from scratch @ the time of 9/11/2001

    It’s obvious if you can think for yourself, the same demolitions explosive team, rigged WTC7 & the two towers

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by James_Madison_Lives View Post
    The Pentagon was meant to be a "honeypot," a distraction to get everyone arguing and away from the much more easily proven points that towers cannot collapse symmetrically in seconds without being wired.



    Buildng 7, do you believe your eyes or what the government tells you?

    I believe what Ron Paul said about the 9/11 attacks. When you piss people off enough who have no recourse, there is blowback. Of course, the media attacked him for "justifying" the 9/11 attacks but really what he was doing was pointing out the motive.

    AFAIK he has never personally endorsed any of the beliefs that there was a controlled demolition of the towers.

    People are free to believe what they want, but that is a really tough pill to get (most) people to swallow. We're doing good enough to convince people that our meddling overseas is not really in America's best interests, for a variety of reasons.
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    This is getting silly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It started silly.
    T.S. Eliot's The Hollow Men

    "One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." - Plato

    We Are Running Out of Time - Mini Me

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by nobody's_hero View Post
    I believe what Ron Paul said about the 9/11 attacks. When you piss people off enough who have no recourse, there is blowback. Of course, the media attacked him for "justifying" the 9/11 attacks but really what he was doing was pointing out the motive.

    AFAIK he has never personally endorsed any of the beliefs that there was a controlled demolition of the towers.

    People are free to believe what they want, but that is a really tough pill to get (most) people to swallow. We're doing good enough to convince people that our meddling overseas is not really in America's best interests, for a variety of reasons.
    You're standing exactly where I was standing circa 2009 when I began my journey on 9/11 truth. And I'll skip ahead 13 years of learning to give you the punchline: it doesn't matter how it was done, it was a false flag used to start illegal wars and pass a raft of literal Enabling Act legislation (Patriot Act, NDAA, MCA, NDAA2, etc.) Nobody is denying the fact of blowback from US foreign policy and, of course, Ron Paul is exactly on-point that that's the primary lesson that the politicians in Congress, and even many ordinary Americans, need to learn from 9/11. But the fact remains that not only did they lie, they all lied, on record, in the biggest cover-up in history except for the crucifixion itself. Was it planted charges? Remotely-operated drones? Were the hijackers actually on the planes or just executed and their bodies disposed at sea? Was it holograms or CGI? Who knows and, frankly, it doesn't matter because no matter which of these stories is the true one (or something else altogether), what we know for sure is that the official report is provably and materially false.

    Can you think of any other massive political event that was surrounded by exactly the same cloud of supposed "fog-of-war confusion"? How many different versions of JFK's assassination have you heard? The MO is a fingerprint and it's a complete give-away. I'm not black-pilling, either. I'm just saying that you have to let the facts say what the facts say, no matter how uncomfortable it is. And I don't need to convince anyone to believe that the WTC towers were destroyed by controlled demolition. But people do need to wake up to the fact that they're being lied to in all the ways that are supposed to be impossible because of all the "terrible consequences" that would happen to the people in charge if they lied on record. That's precisely what they've been doing for many decades -- longer than I've been alive -- on an industrial scale... cosmic even. They are lying so hard it can't even be explained in words how much they're lying. Not all of it is provable, but anyone with basic common-sense and two brain-cells to rub together can easily arrive at 99.9% confidence that they are being lied to just by comparing the known historical facts of these events with the official story about them. We are being lied to by the very people who can put us in prison for 30 years to life for lying to a federal official. Think about that power-differential. Think about how that plays into plea-deals. Wanna risk getting 30 years in federal prison while trying to prove a speculative theory about how you think someone in office broke federal law and lied on record? Now, think about the implications to representative government. How are the States supposed to be holding the Federal government to its constitutional obligations when there is this absurd differential in power? The table is tilted, they have their thumb on the scales... no, they've parked a Mack truck on the scales and we're required pretend that their "justice" is blind. Well, it's blind, but not in that sense...

    This is why people need to wake up and stop accepting "The Narrative". There are many paths to that destination. If 9/11 doesn't work for you, that's OK. Find another path. But if you have even one honest cell in your body, your arrival at the destination is inevitable, because nobody can honestly believe the lies we are being told after informing themselves about what is really going on, even slightly. Ron Paul has played a key role in starting this ball rolling... it's up to us to keep the momentum...
    Psalm 35:7-10, Psalm 109, Isaiah 13:9

  15. #13
    Questioning the narrative is extreme and unpatriotic.

  16. #14
    My problem with the "controlled demolition" theory has always been the complexity of the operation. Have you ever seen a building prepped for demolition? I have. I was working construction in Pittsburgh in 2000, when Three Rivers Stadium was imploded. The number of workers involved in prepping the structure for demolition was in the hundreds. Almost every concrete column was jackhammered and set with charges, and this was done irrespective of plumbing, electrical, cable, and other utilities which often follow along those columns, because at that point in time none of those utilities mattered anymore. I find it HIGHLY unlikely that not only could those MASSIVE buildings been rigged to implode without anyone finding out about it beforehand, nor without any disruption to any of the various utilities which would have been affected by the work required to rig them. And that's before the question of why none of the likely HUNDREDS of people who would have been needed to do the work haven't ever had a case of conscience, or that no PHYSICAL evidence of said demolition was never found by any of the THOUSANDS of workers on site to clean up the mess. And then there is also the question of what happens if something goes wrong? What happens if someone failed to wire a column on the 85th floor, for example, correctly, and the "demolition" fails, the top of the building falls off, and all of those explosives below that floor are just there for any Joe Shmoe firefighter to find after the fact?

    I'm definitely fine with the LIHOP theory, but the MIHOP theory to me is just too fantastical. It's far easier to just let the planes hit the buildings, let the chips fall where they may, some spook walks up to the rubble pile and plants Atta's passport in the debris and it's go time in the Middle East again. That's way more easy, way more plausible, and way less risky. Hell I'm even down with the idea that the terrorists were CIA assets... but a controlled demolition? Nah.

  17. #15
    "My problem with the "controlled demolition" theory has always been the complexity of the operation. Have you ever seen a building prepped for demolition? I have. "

    (Whomever orchestrated 911, could handle "complexities" lol )

    Again, keep in mind that Larry Silverstein BUILT WTC7 from scratch. That's the only high rise (47 stories) he ever built before reconstruction & he had 100% control for 15 years. He had 3 months of control on WTC 1 & WTC 2

    (Obviously His $$$ 4.6 Billion Terrorism Insurance payout for destruction of WTC's is the follow the $$ part) for controlled demolition. The 2 bigger towers had asbestos (fire proofing ) issues & were a huge liability for him.


    Whomever wired the 3 towers to explode DID NOT USE WIRES imo. LOL It was most likely done with timed wireless detonation devices set off with a remote computer system. & above engineer (first post in thread) explains how nano thermite can be used with paint as an applicant


    Sons of liberty, how do you watch WTC7 collapse on video & not reach the conclusion it was a controlled explosion??
    Last edited by vita3; 09-19-2022 at 06:46 AM.

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty View Post
    My problem with the "controlled demolition" theory has always been the complexity of the operation.
    Sherlock Holmes' rule applies. Eliminate the impossible and whatever is left, no matter how improbable, must be so.

    Fire at anything less than thermite reaction temperature doesn't melt steel. Burning buildings with steel framing don't fall. Even professional demolition teams produce implosions where the buildings fall over. A skyscraper falling straight down on chance just can't possibly happen.

    The official tale is impossible. It's fake news. It's a fairy tale. Even producing the slick CIA video I saw on 9/12/01 in a single day was impossible.

    Now, about the rest. The Twin Towers did not have traditional steel skeletons. There were outside curtain walls and inner cores. Each floor was attached to the core, and the outer wall, and had no other support. Cause the inner cores to fall straight down and the floors drag the curtain walls in and down. And we know they fell first, because the TV antennas in the middle of the roof began falling before the outer walls. See my pics above. Three Rivers Stadium they were not.

    The inner cores were all bathrooms, plumbing, wiring conduits and elevator shafts. Likely or unlikely, working in an elevator shaft without being seen isn't impossible. Having one of many elevators out of service for one or more days isn't impossible. It might not even be noticed.

    As for Building Seven, it was closed for weeks for "security enhancements" in 2001. The security company was run by Marvin Bush.

    The level of evil is hard to wrap your mind around. It isn't a pleasant process, and I'd have preferred to avoid it. But the fact is, LIHOP is impossible. Physically impossible, because physics. Controlled demolition, though complex, risky, and involving many accomplices who must be either watched or systematically eliminated, is improbable, yes. But it isn't impossible, and the only alternative is literally, physically impossible.

    Sorry, but it's true.

    Quote Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty View Post
    And that's before the question of why none of the likely HUNDREDS of people who would have been needed to do the work haven't ever had a case of conscience, or that no PHYSICAL evidence of said demolition was never found by any of the THOUSANDS of workers on site to clean up the mess.
    Some evidence has. But any which isn't in the possession of government is stolen property, and could get someone imprisoned.

    As for mythical CIA employees with consciences, suppose such a unicorn exists. Do they know what will happen to them, and quite possibly their families, if they speak up? Because we know The Company is mixed up in this. They admitted to producing that "explanation" video that aired on 9/12, remember?
    Last edited by acptulsa; 09-19-2022 at 09:12 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    And?
    Dems cheat.
    Trump stopped them cheating.

    A clear case of Liberty preserving authoritarianism.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    Sherlock Holmes' rule applies. Eliminate the impossible and whatever is left, no matter how improbable, must be so.

    Fire at anything less than thermite reaction temperature doesn't melt steel. Burning buildings with steel framing don't fall. Even professional demolition teams produce implosions where the buildings fall over. A skyscraper falling straight down on chance just can't possibly happen.
    Of course the steel didn't melt. That would be an absurd assertion.

    There were heavy steel columns at the core of the buildings. Aside from any structural damage which may have occurred at impact, I can't imagine any relevance to the structural steel columns constituting the core of the buildings. However, the floor trusses were significantly less heavy, and though they would not have "melted", the heat from the fires would have significantly weakened them to cause collapse - the trusses connected the interior steel columns to the exterior steel frame. Once they were weakened significantly enough, it's entirely possible that the buildings could have collapsed in the manner in which they did - the trusses were exactly what held the floors up.

    The official tale is impossible. It's fake news. It's a fairy tale. Even producing the slick CIA video I saw on 9/12/01 in a single day was impossible.

    Now, about the rest. The Twin Towers did not have traditional steel skeletons. There were outside curtain walls and inner cores. Each floor was attached to the core, and the outer wall, and had no other support. Cause the inner cores to fall straight down and the floors drag the curtain walls in and down. And we know they fell first, because the TV antennas in the middle of the roof began falling before the outer walls. See my pics above. Three Rivers Stadium they were not.

    The inner cores were all bathrooms, plumbing, wiring conduits and elevator shafts. Likely or unlikely, working in an elevator shaft without being seen isn't impossible. Having one of many elevators out of service for one or more days isn't impossible. It might not even be noticed.
    Those buildings had a footprint of somewhere in the neighborhood of an acre - over 43,000 SF. They EACH were over 100 stories tall. You're suggesting that no one noticed the necessarily HUNDREDS of workers who would have been needed to plant charges on what amounted to probably anywhere from 25 to 50 acres of real estate? Not one worker? Not one security guard? Air-chiseling away fireproofing, running wire, etc.? That all just went unnoticed?

    I'll see your Sherlock assertion and raise you Occam's Razor - when presented with competing theories regarding the same outcome, one should select the theory with the fewest assumptions.

    As for Building Seven, it was closed for weeks for "security enhancements" in 2001. The security company was run by Marvin Bush.
    I have no explanation for Building 7, sir. I'll grant you that for sure.

    The level of evil is hard to wrap your mind around. It isn't a pleasant process, and I'd have preferred to avoid it.
    I have no problem wrapping my head around this level of evil. I'm well acquainted with the history of the state, and the levels of depravity to which it will sink in order to achieve it's ends. Precisely so, in fact. I do not believe the state is so foolish as to open itself to such weakness. We're dealing with a unique evil, not a clumsy and haphazard one. It's far easier to allow September 11th to occur as it did, whether the towers fell or not, and use it for their ends regardless. In fact, it would have been even better for the state had the towers NOT collapsed - imagine the contracts that could have been given out to bring them down AND tote them away, rather than just tote them away as it were.

    But the fact is, LIHOP is impossible. Physically impossible, because physics.
    It's just not, though. It's not impossible that those towers collapsed as they did. The floor trusses failed, and the weight of the floors above collapsed the buildings downward. I'll grant you, I'm not a physicist, nor an engineer, but it's not that hard to conceive. I'm not a pilot nor an aeronautical engineer, but I can conceive of what would happen if thrust underperforms the weight of the aircraft.

    Controlled demolition, though complex, risky, and involving many accomplices who must be either watched or systematically eliminated, is improbable, yes. But it isn't impossible, and the only alternative is literally, physically impossible.

    Sorry, but it's true.
    Don't be sorry. We disagree. Neither of us have the ability to prove it either way. My assertion is based upon the risk of the operation. MIHOP is a Rube Goldberg Machine of monumental proportions - this isn't killing a president in an open limo surrounded by tall buildings, curb gutters and bushes. It's one that would run a high degree of risk of failing in broad daylight that resulted in the murder of thousands of citizens.

    I 100% believe that the state is capable of horrific crimes. They just typically do so in ways that don't result in them getting caught so easily. One floor of charges fails, or even half a floor and the building topples over and leaves the rest of the charges there to be discovered? Then what, Tom Clancy?

    Some evidence has. But any which isn't in the possession of government is stolen property, and could get someone imprisoned.

    As for mythical CIA employees with consciences, suppose such a unicorn exists. Do they know what will happen to them, and quite possibly their families, if they speak up? Because we know The Company is mixed up in this. They admitted to producing that "explanation" video that aired on 9/12, remember?
    There aren't enough CIA employees to have set those charges, man. Again, those buildings occupied over 43,000 SF of footprint. I'm not even sure how many steel columns there were within the core of that building. And to ENSURE that those floors collapsed, they would have had to have blown the floor trusses, too. How are you doing that - to ensure that the buildings totally failed as they did - without ANYONE noticing?

    Again, Occam's Razor. I just don't think you guys understand the level of complexity we're talking about, here. Especially when they could have just sat back, allowed the ragheads to fly those planes into those buildings and just let the chips fall where they may... Why wouldn't they have? What's their motivation otherwise?

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty View Post
    My problem with the "controlled demolition" theory has always been the complexity of the operation. Have you ever seen a building prepped for demolition? I have. I was working construction in Pittsburgh in 2000, when Three Rivers Stadium was imploded. The number of workers involved in prepping the structure for demolition was in the hundreds. Almost every concrete column was jackhammered and set with charges, and this was done irrespective of plumbing, electrical, cable, and other utilities which often follow along those columns, because at that point in time none of those utilities mattered anymore. I find it HIGHLY unlikely that not only could those MASSIVE buildings been rigged to implode without anyone finding out about it beforehand, nor without any disruption to any of the various utilities which would have been affected by the work required to rig them. And that's before the question of why none of the likely HUNDREDS of people who would have been needed to do the work haven't ever had a case of conscience, or that no PHYSICAL evidence of said demolition was never found by any of the THOUSANDS of workers on site to clean up the mess. And then there is also the question of what happens if something goes wrong? What happens if someone failed to wire a column on the 85th floor, for example, correctly, and the "demolition" fails, the top of the building falls off, and all of those explosives below that floor are just there for any Joe Shmoe firefighter to find after the fact?

    I'm definitely fine with the LIHOP theory, but the MIHOP theory to me is just too fantastical. It's far easier to just let the planes hit the buildings, let the chips fall where they may, some spook walks up to the rubble pile and plants Atta's passport in the debris and it's go time in the Middle East again. That's way more easy, way more plausible, and way less risky. Hell I'm even down with the idea that the terrorists were CIA assets... but a controlled demolition? Nah.
    The "how" doesn't matter. What matters is that the official story is a provable lie.

    And as for "impossibility", please never attend a stage-magic show, you will be existentially undone. What is "possible" or "impossible" is entirely a matter of perspective...

    Psalm 35:7-10, Psalm 109, Isaiah 13:9

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty View Post
    And to ENSURE that those floors collapsed, they would have had to have blown the floor trusses, too.
    No, I have to disagree with that. Like I say, the film confirms that the antennas on the center of the roof began falling before the walls did. So, the central cores fell, and fell first. Without those, the floors had zero chance of resisting gravity. Without the central cores, those buildings were houses of cards.

    They also took up a fraction of the total footprint of the buildings.

    I think it is impossible for them to collapse as they did. It isn't just a matter of the antennas falling before the walls, though that is very compelling evidence. If the floor joists failing caused the collapse, how did they knock down the central cores? They were very stout, basically narrow, traditionally built steel frame skyscrapers in the middle of the wider buildings. So, they're getting jabbed by floor beams falling around them, and not only does this cause them to fall, but they fall straight down, and fall first?

    That, it seems to me, is the assumption that throws the balance to the demolition side of that razor, because it's an impossible assumption.

    https://odysee.com/@Usulz_WTC:7/9_11WT-1:2

    https://odysee.com/@911truthnow:7/no...study-during:6

    Even if you think the antenna and the outer walls start falling at the same moment, your model just doesn't explain that.
    Last edited by acptulsa; 09-19-2022 at 11:48 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    And?
    Dems cheat.
    Trump stopped them cheating.

    A clear case of Liberty preserving authoritarianism.

  23. #20
    "I have no explanation for Building 7, sir. I'll grant you that for sure."

    Good to hear, common sense still lives


    Honestly, I just found out that Building 7 was Silverstein sole new construction project before 911

    Don't ever ignore the $4.4 Billion Silverstein got from terrorist Insurance for his WTC buildings. largest payout EVER

    That's a Zion Mountain worth of Shekels for what is essentially " Jewish Lightning "
    Last edited by vita3; 09-19-2022 at 12:08 PM.

  24. #21
    You asked what would be the motivation for destroying the wtc?

    Besides the $4.4 Billion Insurance payment that your ignoring for some reason...

    the twin towers had asbestos sprayed everywhere as fireproofing

    That’s a serious liability for its new owner

    “When World Trade Center construction commenced in 1968, asbestos remained a common building material. Asbestos products were used often in construction during this era, and the international medical community was only beginning to understand the dangers of asbestos exposure.
    Asbestos served as a common insulator and flame-retardant. Asbestos products also lined the walls and ceilings and covered pipes and wiring throughout the original World Trade Center buildings.
    Here are three other noteworthy facts about the original World Trade Center site:
    ARCHITECT MINORU YAMASAKI DESIGNED THE TWIN TOWERS.
    AT GROUNDBREAKING, THE WORLD TRADE CENTER WAS THE WORLD’S LARGEST CONSTRUCTION WORK ZONE.
    WHEN THEY WERE COMPLETED IN 1973, 1 WORLD TRADE CENTER AND 2 WORLD TRADE CENTER WERE THE TALLEST BUILDINGS IN THE WORLD.
    Asbestos abatement efforts gathered steam in the years following World Trade Center completion. Although subsequent regulations have curtailed asbestos exposure in the workplace, that danger remained hidden inside the World Trade Center and so many other mid-century buildings.”

  25. #22
    I just don't see those floors pulling the inner cores down instantaneously.

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    And?
    Dems cheat.
    Trump stopped them cheating.

    A clear case of Liberty preserving authoritarianism.

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    No, I have to disagree with that. Like I say, the film confirms that the antennas on the center of the roof began falling before the walls did. So, the central cores fell, and fell first. Without those, the floors had zero chance of resisting gravity. Without the central cores, those buildings were houses of cards.
    This assumes that the antenna (North tower only, I believe?) was only supported by the core columns. I'm not sure that's the case. Once the floors began to collapse, the weight of the antenna seems likely to have failed before anything else.

    They also took up a fraction of the total footprint of the buildings.

    I think it is impossible for them to collapse as they did.
    Okay. And I think it is impossible that those buildings could have been wired for demolition without ANYone outside of the operation having ANY knowledge of it, nor ANY of the participants not experiencing a case of conscience. Not ONE whistleblower. Not ONE witness. Again, we're not talking about an unauthorized firework at a high school football game, here. We're talking about wiring TWO buildings the size of FOUR football fields - EACH - for controlled demolition.

    It isn't just a matter of the antennas falling before the walls, though that is very compelling evidence. If the floor joists failing caused the collapse, how did they knock down the central cores? They were very stout, basically narrow, traditionally built steel frame skyscrapers in the middle of the wider buildings.
    They weren't 1000' tall columns. They were likely riveted together. Those connections were the weak points.

    So, they're getting jabbed by floor beams falling around them, and not only does this cause them to fall, but they fall straight down, and fall first?

    That, it seems to me, is the assumption that throws the balance to the demolition side of that razor, because it's an impossible assumption.

    https://odysee.com/@Usulz_WTC:7/9_11WT-1:2

    https://odysee.com/@911truthnow:7/no...study-during:6

    Even if you think the antenna and the outer walls start falling at the same moment, your model just doesn't explain that.
    Listen, I'm not saying "they" weren't capable of it. They most certainly were - and are to this day. I understand our lives are MEANINGLESS to them. I'm just saying that they are HIGHLY incentivized to NOT get caught doing it, and as such the simplest path forward for them is to just let a bunch of ragheads fly planes into those buildings and whatever happens, happens.

    It is ENTIRELY possible that, if you poke a big hole in a building with a big plane, and undermine the stability of the above superstructure, the above superstructure will collapse and potentially carry with it the whole of the building. The entire core actually did NOT fail - there are pictures of the steel core of the buildings probably rising 30 or so stores out of the rubble, perhaps even more.

    Regardless, why would "they" risk demo'ing those buildings when they could just as easily let the planes fly into them and let the chips fall where they may? What's the risk v. reward??

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by vita3 View Post
    You asked what would be the motivation for destroying the wtc?

    Besides the $4.4 Billion Insurance payment that your ignoring for some reason...

    the twin towers had asbestos sprayed everywhere as fireproofing

    That’s a serious liability for its new owner

    “When World Trade Center construction commenced in 1968, asbestos remained a common building material. Asbestos products were used often in construction during this era, and the international medical community was only beginning to understand the dangers of asbestos exposure.
    Asbestos served as a common insulator and flame-retardant. Asbestos products also lined the walls and ceilings and covered pipes and wiring throughout the original World Trade Center buildings.
    Here are three other noteworthy facts about the original World Trade Center site:
    ARCHITECT MINORU YAMASAKI DESIGNED THE TWIN TOWERS.
    AT GROUNDBREAKING, THE WORLD TRADE CENTER WAS THE WORLD’S LARGEST CONSTRUCTION WORK ZONE.
    WHEN THEY WERE COMPLETED IN 1973, 1 WORLD TRADE CENTER AND 2 WORLD TRADE CENTER WERE THE TALLEST BUILDINGS IN THE WORLD.
    Asbestos abatement efforts gathered steam in the years following World Trade Center completion. Although subsequent regulations have curtailed asbestos exposure in the workplace, that danger remained hidden inside the World Trade Center and so many other mid-century buildings.”
    I'm not "ignoring for some reason". Don't put that on me. I'm not a denier. I'm a $#@!ing realist.

    Whether or not the buildings fell to the ground, once the planes flew into them, they were "totalled". Silverstein was getting a payout regardless of whether the buildings collapsed or not. Try again.



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    I just don't see those floors pulling the inner cores down instantaneously.

    That pic is of 1/10th (approx) of the total height of one of the buildings. Inconsequential to what occurred over 900' higher on 9/11.

  30. #26
    "Whether or not the buildings fell to the ground, once the planes flew into them, they were "totalled". Silverstein was getting a payout regardless of whether the buildings collapsed or not. Try again."


    Sure he gets a payout, but I don't think he gets anywhere near $4.4 Billion, if those towers don't come crumbling down.

    You get the asbestos liability disappearance? Nice way to avoid having to pay for its removal

    You know WTC7 was controlled demo, how the F* was WTC 1 & 2 not? Only Steel strucuture ever to collapse upon itself

    Eyes don't lie.

    Neocons certainly did this. They destroy, make $#@! tons of $$$$ off of it & lie about it.

    Once joe public figures their scam out they are on to the next one.

    911, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Covid & currently Ukraine.

  31. #27

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty View Post
    Regardless, why would "they" risk demo'ing those buildings when they could just as easily let the planes fly into them and let the chips fall where they may? What's the risk v. reward??
    I can think of two, besides the huge amounts of asbestos problem.

    If you're trying to start a couple of twenty year wars and convince a bunch of red-blooded Americans to enlist, the phrase "go big or go home" can be a powerful lure. These people are psychopaths, after all.

    WTC 7 was the one full of federal trial evidence, but not tall enough to stand up above its neighbors. A decision could have been made that trying to drop an airplane down on it was too risky. But letting the chips fall likely wouldn't have done enough damage to it to give them an excuse to "pull it".
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    And?
    Dems cheat.
    Trump stopped them cheating.

    A clear case of Liberty preserving authoritarianism.

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by vita3 View Post
    WTC Asbestos Liability.. poof gone w/ demolition

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/asbestos_pix/5052904133
    Asbestos. Isn't that something that is tabu to breathe? What about all those people that breathed the dust particles for hours, days, months, after the catastrophe?

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged View Post
    Asbestos. Isn't that something that is tabu to breathe? What about all those people that breathed the dust particles for hours, days, months, after the catastrophe?
    What about them?

    Do you have any idea how many NYC first responders have died since then? No, you probably don't; it's not like that gets any publicity. All I know is they've been dropping like flies.

    A big, fat rise in the number of lung cancer cases during a few decades of deconstructing those monstrosities would have gotten Silverstein and the Port Authority sued. But how does one serve a subpoena on al Quaeda?

    Last edited by acptulsa; 09-20-2022 at 05:55 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    And?
    Dems cheat.
    Trump stopped them cheating.

    A clear case of Liberty preserving authoritarianism.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-21-2017, 08:22 PM
  2. Replies: 39
    Last Post: 03-11-2015, 11:49 PM
  3. Book Review - Fantastic Voyages: Teaching Science with Science Fiction
    By mikemarotta in forum Science & Technology
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-25-2013, 03:08 PM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-22-2010, 12:20 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •